i 


Ct^i 




^b 


OJ 




^m 


M42 





J" ^^ •> ' ^^ "^ V / <L^ ^^ •.^' 






\ "^ _^ -f^^ \ 'i- ^ 

- '°*' x^^' ^-^ ,>^ ^<«'°" ^^ % 













^ V 



' • o. 



\'-^\c/ X^^^^'^V %'--%^ \"--\ 









y- 






.^^ -o^ • --;•;. • •* / \ - ■ . ;■; •• ,.*' "°. ■••■■•■ / . . ' 

x^^ -^^ <i> ^^^ •>. '^^ "^- ^- 



X 



n 



HOUSE No. 74. 



REPORT 



oy Tm 



PETITIOIV OF S. P. SANFORD AND OTHERS, 



CONCERNIKO 



DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. 



yy- 



l> 



f 








J; April, 1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 3 



eommon\uealtl) of M^fifi*itliUHtttti* 



House of Representatives, April 3, 1839. 

The Committee to whom was referred the petition of S. 
P. Sanford, and other females of Dorciiester, pra)'ing 
tlie rej)eal of all laws of Massachusetts, making any 
distinction on account of color among the inhabitants, 
have considered the subject, and respectfully submit 
their 

REPORT: 

With the memorial of the ladies of Dorchester, in- 
structions were delivered to the Committee, to ascertain 
whether any fraud had been practised in obtaining signa- 
tures to the paper, and by whose authority it was offered. 
Not conceiving that the word "/rrmf?" was employed by 
the House to annex harsh descri{)tion to acts, which, if 
incorrect, might have been the result of misguided zeal, 
or mistaken judgment, the commission has been construed 
to direct general inquiry into the origin of the petition 
and the manner of its presentation. 

As much time as was requisite, and could be spared 
from more important engagements of public service, has 
been devoted to the discharge of an unwelcome task. 
Sessions were held from week to week, attended by all 
who desired to see, or hear, or speak, on the subject of 



4 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

the examinntion. Those interested in its progress or re- 
sulis, liHve been present, with counsel learned in the laws, 
or friends lending gratuitous aid. The Committee felt 
that they might safely entrust the labor of collecting tes- 
timony to those whose diligence was stimulated hy strong 
feeling, without exercising the extensive power of send- 
ing for persons or searching for papers. The voluntary 
attendance of witnesses anticij)ated the issue of any com- 
pulsory process or official summons. Relieved hy able 
counsel, who could present explanations and evidence in 
the manner most agreeable to the j)arlies, and best adap- 
ted to elicit truth, it remains for the Committee, ha\ing 
endeavored to discharge their duty \\ ith im))artiality, to 
attempt to exhibit its results with fairness. 

The necessity of a tedious detail of voluminous evi- 
dence, will be obviated by reference to an abstract of the 
testimony of witnesses, prej)ared and a|)j)ended by the 
chairman, and to original documents annexed to this re- 
port. They will afford the means of verifying the state- 
ments made, and of correcting any inaccuracy which 
may inadvertently occur. A brief summary of the prin- 
cipal facts, and most material conclusions, will possibly 
be found to lay a tax on patience sufficiently severe. 

The petition, on the face, purports to express the opin- 
ion of two hundred and eleven females, on a question of 
legislation. From the request to repeal all existing laws 
on a particular subject, it would be {)resumed, in the ab- 
sence of an\ I'XjjIanations, that ihc\ had considered the 
policy and o|)eration of the statutes. 

It will be convenient to arranue in classes the facts de- 
veloped, as they relate to the authenticity of the memo- 
rial and the weiizht to be allowed to the signatures. 

First. It ai)peared that some of those signatures were 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 6 

not genuine. The worthy mutron, wlio has lind the mis- 
fortune to be named at the liead of the cohimn of sisn- 
eis, and to he recorded foremost amouir those sohciiiii": 
the repeal of the law of color, expressly declined to be- 
come a p;irty to a measure which six; disapproved. Two 
other names, next following on the roll, are denied to be 
in the hand writing, or to have been inscribed wiih the 
consent of the ladies. It was admitted, that they were 
placed in the position they occu|)y, by one of the witnes- 
ses. In explanation, it \vas stated, and tesiiinony was 
offered tending to show, that such circumstances existed 
as to justify tiie supposition in the writer that the use of 
the names was authorized. 

Second. Some names were written on the petition, 
without j)revious consultation with the principals, in the 
expectation that they would ratify the act of the volun- 
tary attorney. In one instance, wiien conlirmation was 
subserjuently sought, it was refused. 

Third. The memorial is expressed to be from females 
of Dorchester. Two ladies of Milton became subscri- 
bers, without noticing the terms confining its circulation 
within the limits of a town. 

Fourth. Names are written twice upon tiie same pa- 
per, and by being repeated, eight subscriptions are niulti- 
plicd to sixte(?n. The explanation offered was, that they 
were accidentally signed by different members of the 
same household without wrong j)urj)ose. The repetition 
affords intrinsic evidence of carelessness not respectful to 
the Leiiislature, nor entirelv excusable in the exercise of 
an important privilege. 

Fifth. The names of minors are included in the lists 
without the age being indicated. The effect is decep- 
tive, when the inmates of the nursery are presented 



6 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

among adult members of the community, praying for 
chaii'Tes affeclinjr the closest relations of social and do- 

mestic life. 

Sixth. Signatures were affixed to the memorial under 
mistake of its meaning, and with the understanding that 
it related to the district of Columbia, and not to the state 
of Massachusetts. The language of thirty-two of the 
subscribers of the petition, in one of the papers communi- 
cated to the Committee, will elucidate this point. 

"Understanding" say they " that our names are at- 
l;iclii"d 10 a jjetiiion from the ladies of Dorchester to abol- 
ish all laws making distinction on account of color, we 
take the oppoituniiy to say to the Committee, that we 
never knowingly signed such petition, but understood it 
to be a petition for abolishing slavery in the District of 
Columbia : and if our names are annexed to such i)eti- 
tion it was done without our consent or knowledge, or 
under misre[)rescntaiions, and we respectfully ask to have 
our names taken from the same." 

Of those \\lio appeared in jjcrson, or addressed the 
Conmiiitee in writing, /b/i^-OJie were not acquainted with 
the object of the petition, but designed to lend their 
names to promote refortiiation of the institutions of other 
states, and advance the cause of freedom. 

Seventh. Some signatures were obtained under the 
belief thiit the laws of the Commonwealth made distinc- 
tions of civil rights between the inhabitants. 

In other states, it is true, there are statutes which give 
the terrible power to tear asunder the relations of domes- 
tic life, to break the tics of parental affection and filial 
love, and to crush llic h;i|)|)in('.ss of homes which may be 
bunibh", but should be smckhI, by the scpaiaiion of parent 
and child, and of husband and wife. One race is disfran- 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 7 

chised, while iinother is invested with the authority of 
oppression. No such acts of misery disgrace tlie statute- 
book of Massachusetts, to be bewailed by the tears of any 
of its inhabitants. Even when the institution of shivery 
darkened the soil of New Enghuid, it existed in a miti- 
gated and comparatively mild form. Many of the impre- 
cations of its abstract evils, breathed against others, 
unhappily came back to rest on the graves of our own 
honored ancestors. The revolution, whose principles are 
embodied in the Constitution, shattered the last link of 
servitude, and the citizens have since been, in the view 
of the law, equally free in thought, and word, and act, 
entitled to the same protection, sharing the same civil 
privileges, and enjoying the even distribution of the bless- 
ings of the great charity of government provided for all 
comjjiexions, without discrimination. 

On this subject, some misunderstanding has prevailed 
in the community. It has been imagined, that the peti- 
tions have intimate connexion with the abolition of slav- 
ery, and were necessary parts of that series of eloquent 
remonstrances against its dark dominion, which have gone 
up from the villages of the north to the national assembly. 
Whatever may have been the intentions of the females, 
the terms they employ cannot be applied to the emanci- 
pation of the slave. If the words are not well chosen, it 
is the fault of those who have written, and not of those 
who are compelled to read them, according to the com- 
mon and usual signification. They are limited, by their 
own force, to a particular state and to a distinct subject. 
First, the memorialists ask the repeal of laws of 3Iassa- 
chusetts, a C »inii oi wealth free in the broadest sense of 
liberty, where no servitude is permitted. Next, they 
point to laws making distinctions among the inhabitants 



8 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

on account of color. To find what enactments are in- 
cluded wiliiin the desc-ription, reference to the statute 
shows, that the only peculiar ordinances recognising the 
complexions of tlie citizens, ar'; those of marriage and 
divorce. The obligations of military service, derived 
from the legislature of the Union, as they were imposed, 
can only he rescindtnl hy the delegated power higher than 
stale sovereignty. The jjciiiions, expressly confined to 
laws of Massachusetts, must be applied to the aljoliiion 
of the restraints on matrimonial alliance, and not to the 
extinction of the oppression of slavery where it has no 

existence. 

The Committee are unable to perceive, that any law of 
Massachusetts can rightly and fairly be considered as 
makin"- distinctions anions: its inhabitants. The statute 
forbidding the white from uniting in marriage with the 
])lack, or red, or mixed race, forbids the colored from 
joining in nuptial riles with the white. It deals with all 
as slaiiding on the same common and level ground of 
equality. No privilege is bestowed, no prohibition en- 
forced for one, which is not given or restrained for the 
other. No immunity is provided, and no restriction im- 
posed, which is not balanced by even-handed justice. 
Where each race is treated alike, the supposed distinction, 
restin"^ on no real difference, is too shadowy to be grasped 
by reason. If ])r('judice has built walls of partition be- 
tween the walks of the members of the same social fam- 
ily, they must be removed by that spirit of liberality 
already busy in its work. The progress of its improve- 
ments would be little! aided by anniiHing laws regarded » 
as wholesome through two centuries of experience. 

An explanation of ihe misapplication of the memorials, 
which has taken place, too reasonable to be doubted, was 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 9 

afforded bv an intellisent "eiitlciniui, who attended the 
sessions of the Committee as counsel lor some of the fe- 
males. For the ])m-j)().se of obtaining tlie exjiression of 
public opinion on toj)ics of int(;rest, petitions were j)rc- 
pared by those who have ardently engaged in the work 
of emancipation, for circulation through the wliole coun- 
try. Among them was that relating to color, appropriate 
to portions of the Union where distinctions exist amount- 
ing to the deprivation of every ipolilical right. This was 
distributed in New England, and has been subscribed in 
many, if not in most instances, without knowing tlu; ap- 
plication to an institution embraced by its terms, must be 
applied, and without designing to solicit a change of the 
marriajre svstem of the Commonwcsilth. 

Of those who appeared before the Committ(M^ or com- 
mimicaled their views in writing, six declared th;it they 
fiillv understood the j)recise application of the jicliiions, 
knowingly affixed th; ir signatiu-es, and were ready to 
maintain the princij)les they adopted. Doubtless there 
may be others, unrepresented, who may concur in the 
same opinions. 

While the virtues and graces of the memorialists com- 
mand admiration and res[)ect, the Committee hav(! the 
misfortune to dissent entirely from the views entertained 
by sonie. They are ready to admit, th;it the erroneous 
course has been prompted by a spirit of charity seeking 
to alleviate suffering, and by that benevolence which 
would j)romote the happiness of the whole human family. 
While they do justice to the jiurity of purpose, they are 
compelled to declare their deliberate conviction, that it is 
inconsistent with the modesty of a virtuous woman to so- 
licit the repeal of laws restraining the union of the white 
and black races in marriage. 



10 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

It is not necessary for the Committee to vindicate tlio 
policy of those statutes from the severe reproach with 
which iht'V have heen assailed. Adopted bv the vene- 
rated lathers of New England, in the early period of its 
history, they were approved by the founders of the Con- 
stitution in the re-enactment of provincial legislation, and 
in recent time received the sanction of the statesmen who 
revised tin; whole legal system of the Commonwealth. 
The bitter words which have been ajjplied, while they 
are insulting to the memories ol' our ancestors, are unjust 
to their descendants. If it was permitted, reference to 
the facts developed by the researches of physiology, 
and to the experience of other lands, would furnish argu- 
ments to show, that demoralizing and degrading effects 
have followed the unhappy connexions prohil)ited by the 
law of Massachusetts. It is to be recollected, that the 
force of legislative ])r()visions for morality, apply to the 
vicious and profligate ; while the high moral sense and 
purity of the; petitioners would afford perfect security 
against the profanation of marriage vows, society could 
find no such protection against the passions of the volup- 
tuous and unprincipled. While the re[)eal of the laws 
would be understood by the l)eneyolent ])etitioners as 
removin;; what lliey consider an odious distinction, it is 
obvious, that it might be taken by the licentious as sanc- 
tioning alliances of misery, and might tend to produce 
heavier i)ractical evils than the possible wrongs to be re- 
lieved. The Legislature, Icnvinir dreamy abstractions to 
theorists, must be confnicd to practical vi{>us. 

The memorial was transmitted to a re|)resentaiive, bv 
a resj)onsil)l(; individual, and was presented to the House 
in conformity with its rules. 

I'he Commiitee have arrived to the conclusion, that 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 11 

the petition of the ladies of Dorchester is erroneous in 
several particulars. Some names are placed on the sheet 
without the consent and against the wish of the respec- 
tal)lo individuals to whom thcv belonij, and are in fact 
false signatures. Some autograph and true subscriptions 
were written und(.'r the impression that the memorial was 
for a different subject — some, that it was addressed to 
Congress and not to the Legislature. It was signed bv 
some, under mistake of the legal distinctions of color — 
hv many without suspicion of the prominent subject em- 
braced bj its terms — by some without reading — by some 
without deliberate consideration — by a few, with full 
knowledge and approbation of the end and object — by 
all, with the intention of expressing their protest against 
a great social evil, and to lend their influence for promo- 
ting a great moral good. 

While the Committee have been satisfied that errors 
have been permitted to exist, they are not ready to attrib- 
ute their origin to fraud or wrong purpose. They are 
willing to believe that they sprung from innocent njistake 
or inadvertence. Benevolent intentions have, perhaps, 
been sometimes executed with zeal too ardent to regard 
possible consequences, and reliance on general rectitude 
of purpose prevented the cautious examination of the 
tendency of particular acts injurious to the interests and 
feelings of others. 

Beneath the inquiry into subjects of local concern or 
personal bearing, which may have excited curiosity of a 
village, there are principles which affect the whole com- 
munity. 

The right of the citizen to address the Legislature, and 
by way of petition or remonstrance to seek redress of 
wrongs and relief from evils, is one of the most sacred ot 



12 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

the privileges of freedom. It is the appeal of the indi- 
vidual to the \\ Iioie people liuough their iej)resentatives. 

\Vhile the free exercise of the ri^ht of petition is to be 
vigilantly defended, it is a solemn duty to j)rotest against 
that abuse which impairs its value, and diminishes confi- 
dence in its list;. 

Heretofore, it has been sup|«)sed that those who have 
the duty of acting in political n)atters, were peculiarly 
entitled to address the Legislature on political questions. 
Undoubtedly, it must be presumed that the employment 
of the great remedy for civil wronij:, should be exercised 
by persons arrived to years of discretion. The facility 
with which the ear of childhood lends itself u ilh unhesi- 
tating confidence to the influence of those it has been 
taught to revere — the control of the parent and guard- 
ian over its acts and almost thouiihts — tlu; want of 
developed intellect and experience to comprehend the- 
theory of government — \\ould deprive its voice of the 
weight d('ri\ t'd from t!ie t>Xj)ressi()n of the opinion of the 
elder citizen. Yet examples might be found, where the 
supplications of the children were mingl(>d with those of 
tlie electors of the Commonwealth, on measures of the 
gravest imjjortance. The wisdom of asking the memo- 
rials of th()S(! uho would not be entrusted wiih the man- 
agement ol" the ordinary affairs of business without over- 
si;:ht, uj)on topics which affect the perpetuity of the 
Union itself, is more than doubtful. 

No man would transmit the common letter of courtesy 
Avithout his own proper signature. No man would place 
the name of another even to a bill of parcels. No man 
would subscribe his own name to the most unimportant 
document of private concern, without attentive perusal. 
The most trilling papers of business, arc executed with 



1839.] HOUSE~No. 74. 13 

cautious formality, and their authenticity certified by the 
attestation of magistrate and witness. The higher and 
graver instrument claiming redress for wrong, and de- 
manding changes which may affect the whole social con- 
dition, has sometimes been prepared with less care than 
would be bestowed on the most hasty communication be- 
tween friends. Hundreds of names are on the petitions 
swelling the files, inscribed by the same hand. It might 
almost be imagined, that an address to the Legislature, 
was considered of too little consequence to deserve even 
the trouble of placing a signature beneath its petition. 

The Committee believe, that the right of petition is 
violated by the perversion to unworthy purposes or by 
negligent use. Danger to our institutions cannot come 
from external violence. If our sail should be profaned 
by an armed foe, the whole population would rise to re- 
pel invasion, and the spirit of the Revolution rekindle by 
every fireside of New England. But peril does spring 
from that silent corruption which excites no attention to 
its undermining course, and from that carelessness per- 
mitting the dearest of the privileges of the citizen to be 
diminished by such abuses as have been tolerated until 
they have grown frequent and common. 

To the Legislature, as trustees for the common good, 
belongs the duty of vindicating their own dignity, and 
defending the right of petition from being degraded or 
brought into contempt, and of marking with reprobation 
every abuse of the privilege whose purity is essential to 
freedom. 

The petition of the ladies of Brookfield, on color, was 
referred to your Committee. It exhibits one hundred 
and sixty names in the same hand-writing. The great 
inconvenience and expense which would have attended 



14 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

summoning so many females from their homes and em- 
ployments, have prevented the attempt to pursue the 
examination by that mode. No satisfactory voluntary 
explanation of the similarity of the signatures has been 
given. Another petition, with the same names save two, 
relating to the abolition of slavery, and of similar pen- 
manship is on the files. Without further instructions, 
the Committee have not deemed it expedient, to prose- 
cute the investigation of the reasons why the original 
papers have been retained, and copies deposited among 
the public archives. 

Having endeavored to discharge the duty assigned 
them in the most foithful manner their circumstances 
permitted, and having expressed their opinions with that 
frankness demanded by respect for the Legislature, the 
Committee ask to be discharged from the further consid- 
eration of the petitions and of the subject. 

Per order, 

MINOTT THAYER, Chairman. 



1839.] MOUSE— No. 74. 15 



EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. 



Rev. David Sanford and Mrs. Ann P. Reed were present, and 
were sworn. 

Rev. David Sanford said, that the lady who signed the certificate 
attached to the letter written by him to the Committee, of 2Gth ult., 
was his wife, and that she signed the certificate. [Marked A.] 

Mrs. Ann P. Reed said, that the petition signed by S. P. San- 
ford and other women of Dorchester, was presented by her to Mrs. 
S. P. Sanford, and that Mrs. Sanford refused to sign it, and gave 
her reasons for not signing it. Tiiat she (Mrs. Reed) took back the 
petition, and obtained several signers, as far on the first column of the 
petition as to the name of Amelia Jordon. She then gave it to Miss 
Catharine .lordon, and other names were added as far as to the name 
of Alalia L. Jordon ; the she (Mrs. Reed) took the petition, and ob- 
tained other names, including the first column, then it was given to 
Miss Sarah Baker, at which time, the three first names were not on 
the petition. 

At the next meeting of the Committee, Mrs. Ruth Hildreth was 
present and was sworn ; and said, that when she signed her name, the 
names of S. P. Sanford and Laura M. .Spaulding were on the petition, 
and there was no space above for others to sign ; that Miss Sarah 
Baker brought her the petition, requested her to sign' it, and took it 
away. 

Mrs. Hildreth further said, that she was surprised to see Mrs. 
Sanford 's name on the petition, as she had understood that Mrs. 
Sanford was opposed to signing it. She also said that she signed the 
names of Mrs. Jane Robinson and Sophia Hildreth, by their partic- 
ular request, and that they were present at the time ; also, that she 
caused the petition to be circulated by one of her children, and that 
she was ignorant of the laws relating to the colored people ; that she 
bad been told that they were deprived of many privileges which 



16 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

the white people enjoyed ; and that had she known them, she 
never would have sigiied the petition. She was asked, in what par- 
ticular she was ignorant of the laws relating to the colored people. 
She replied, that she thought they were deprived of other privileges 
than that of marrying white people. 

To this part of her testimony, Mr. Hildreth, her husband, op- 
posed its being received as evidence. She replied, that she spake 
conscientiously, and she wished to tell the truth, and that she never 
would have signed it, had she known the laws. 

Mr. Oren P. Bacon, was sworn. 

At a subsequent time, iNIr. George Bradbum called on the chair- 
man of the Committee, and said that two ladies wished to see the 
petition, and wished to have the loan of it. This request was re- 
fused in regard to the loan of it, but that they might see it. Accord- 
ingly, the petition was shown to him. Miss Sarah Baker, and an- 
other lady. Sarah Baker said that she signed the petition, and the 
other lady (her sister) said she signed it and would stand to it. 

Mr. George Bradburn said, that the alterations and interlineations 
made on the outside of the petition, was written by him ; that he did 
it to make it belter grammar. 

The Committee has seen several gentlemen of Dorchester upon 
this subject ; one ol them said that his two daughters signed the peti- 
tion after seeing ISlrs. Sanford's nanie on it, and that they did not 
read or know what its contents were, and that many young ladies in 
the town had signed it in the same manner. 

At another meeting of the Committee, Mr. George Bradburn was 
present and was sworn. 

Mr. Bradburn testified and said, that the petition was sent to him 
with a number of others, by Miss Western, of Weymouth, wishing 
him to present them to the Legislature. 

Again said that he was not positive whether it was sent to him by 
Miss Western or Mr. Jackson ; if not by Mr. Jackson, it was by 
Miss Western. 

Quesiion by the Commiltee. Was the petition in the same situa- 
tion that it now is .'' 

Jlnsicer. I do not know ; it appears now to be torn — the altera- 
tions on the outside were made by me, to bring it into form. 

Sarah Baker appeared and refused to be sworn. 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 17 

She was then told that all the witnesses had testified under oaih, 
and that she would not be heard as a wiiness unless she was sworn. 

Mr. Wendal Philips appeared as her friend, and said that she was 
not obliged to commit herself. 

Alter many inquiries, and putting the question, several times, 
whether she signed the name of S. P. Sanford, she wished to an- 
swer by stating many particular circumstances. 

She was told that she must answer the question, and if she did sign 
it, she might give her reasons afterwards. 

Question, again. Did you write the name of S. P. Sanford on 
the petition, and did Mrs. tr'anford ever authorize you to ? 

Answer — I did write the name of Mrs. Sanford on the petition, 
and I have not seen her since. 

Question, again — Did Mrs. Sanford authorize you to sign her 
name.^ 

Answer — She never did authorize me to. 

She also said that she did write the name of Laura M. Spaulding 
on the petition, without her authority, and that she sent the petition to 
the Anti-Slavery Office with directions to its being ]iresented to the 
Legislature. 

She refus ^d t > take an oath — said that she had conscientious scru- 
ples — but would affirm. 

The oath of affirmation was administered to her. 

She then affirmed as follows : — 

In the month of June she was authorized, at the Quarterly Meet- 
ing of the Anti-Slavery Society, to procure petitioners. She re- 
ceived a number of blank petitions from Philadelphia, in July or Au- 
gust last. Sent a number of petitions by Mrs. M. Spaulding to Mrs. 
Sanford. On the second Tuesday of September, had another Quar- 
terly Meeting ; those petitions were brought before tlie meeting with- 
out signatures — gave a number of petitions to Mrs. Ann P. Reed, 
requesting her to get signers. Akev the petitions were returned, a 
discussion took place — and feeling very warm and animated, and mis- 
understanding Mrs. Reed, I wrote the names on the paper, there be- 
ing no space left. 

Mrs. Laura M. Spaulding was sworn. — Knew nothing about the 
matter. 

Almira Baker took the oath of affirmation — Said, that when Sarah 
3 



18 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

Baker gave the petition to Mrs. Spaulding, that she stated, that she 
wished Mr. and Mrs. Sanford to withdraw any one that was iin- 
wilhng to sign. Sarah Baker again said, that at a quarterly meeting, 
she understood Mrs. A. P. Reed to give her authority lo put on 
the names of Mrs. Sanford and Mrs. Spaulding, iliat she was very 
much out of health, and could not recollect many things. 

Question by Mr. Bradburn. — Was the petition circulated some 
two or three months, after the names of S. P. Sanford and Mrs. 
Spaulding were on ? 

Answer — Yes. 

Question by same — Was Mrs. Sanford present in Dorchester 
during the time the petition was circulated after her name was on. 

Answer. — I cannot say. The petitions were in circulation six 
or seven months before they were sent to the Legislature. Knows 
of no person's name on the petition, hut what are now or formerly 
were of Dorchester. 

Rev. Mr. Spaulding was sworn, — And said, that the Rev. Mr. 
Sanford was in Dorchester frequently after the petition was circu- 
lated with Mrs. Sanford's name on it, as often as once a week, some- 
times twice in a week. iNIrs. Sanford was not in Dorchester after her 
name was on the petition ; was acquainted with the petitioners, and 
they were all virtuous women. 

Richard Clapp was sworn, — And said, that ^Ir. Blake, of Dor- 
chester, called on him on Sabbath morning, and said that a lady's 
name was on the petition, that she never signed, and that was wrong 
to put person's names on, that did not consent to. I said so, too ; 
and that I would inquire. I did call on Miss Baker the next day, 
and she said that she knew the person. Miss Baker told me in the 
presence of her mother and sister, that she knew she did sign it, and 
as evidence, her mother and sister saw her sio;n it, with five others, 
and there was no forgery i i this name. 

Mrs. Spaulding called again. — Said ihnt Miss Badger said, that she 
thought that she did not put her name to the paper, but that she put 
her name on after seeing the name of Mrs. Spaulding, and that she 
put her name on all the petitions that were presented to her, that 
-Mrs. Sj)aulding's name was on. 

Question by L. Metcall to .Miss Sarah Baker — Did you not say 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 19 

to Mr. Sanlbid, that you did not sign tlie name of Mrs. Sanford on 
the petition. 

Answer — Mr. Sanford called on uie last Tliursday and being con- 
fined by sickness, 1 had not the power of recollection of facts that 
took place five or six months ago, to answer some of Mr. Sanford's 
questions, this among the rest ; also said that she denied having trans- 
ferred any heading of petitions, and stated to l\[r. Sanford that I did 
write on the outside of the petition that part which appears to have 
been originally written. 

Question again by L. Metcalf, Esq. — Refresh your memory ; 
did not Mr. Sanford ask you whether you did not put the name of 
Mrs. Sanford on the petition.'' 

Answer — i will admit that I did put it on, and the names of Miss 
Patty and the Kenney's family were placed at first on the petition 
by Miss Patty, with the consent of the Pattys. 

Rev. Mr. Sanford testified at a former meeting of the Committee 
that Miss Sarah Baker positively denied to him, that she ever put the 
name of Mrs. S. P. Sanford on the petition. 

Question by i.. Metcalf to Miss Sarah Baker — Did you not 
tell Mr. Sanford that you did not put Mrs. Sanford's name on 
the paper. 

Answer — I think that I added, to the best of my recollection. 

Question by same — How many names have you wrote on the 
paper .'' 

Answer — I think that the names of Rebecca Clapp, Elizabeth 
Clapp, Charlotte Tuttle, E. H. Clapp, were written in pencil, and 
that I wrote them over with a pen ; that E. H. Clapp and Char- 
lotte, names were put down by me without authority ; but afterwards, 
I called on them, before the petition was handed to the Legislature, 
and they said let them go. 

Question by same — Did you not know that Mrs. Sanford refused 
to sign the petition. 

Answer — No. 

Did you not write to Mr. Bradburn, that all the names were writ- 
ten by the persons themselves. 

Answer — I refer you to the letter — which was produced — and is 
annexed. 

Was you acquainted with Mrs. Sanford ^ — Yes 1 was. 



20 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

Was you aware at the time you wrote to Mr. Bradbuin, that Mrs. 
Sanford's name was on the paper. 

Answer — I had no recollection of it at that time ; and I wish to 
add, that after I told Mr. Stanford, I recollected the next day, and 
wrote him, as appears by my letter to Mrs. Sanford. 

Amelia Baker was called. 

Question by Mr. Phillips. — What did Sarah Baker say to Mr. 
Sanlord at the time he asked whether or no she had put his wife's 
name to the petition. 

Answer — After he had asked me so many times, I said that I had 
no recollection — no I have no recollection — when she was asked to 
say yes or no, she refused to answer — the names of Miss Patty and 
the Ken :ey family, w ?re | laced first on the petition by Miss Patty, 
with the consent of the Kenneys in the factory — the second time 
the petition was brought to the house, not certain their names had 
been put down : one of the family wrote them a second time — Miss 
Sarah Baker is acquainted with about seventy of the signers, and about 
sixty of them are professors of Religion. 

Mr. Richard Clapp — Testified that the names of the inmates of 
his brother's family were, Elizabeth, Elizabeth H., Charlotte Tuttle, 
and Rebecca D. Clapp, one of them was dead, and some of them very 
sick before the petition came along, as he understood. 

Miss. Baker — Testified that Ci-arlotte Tuttle and E. H. Clapp, 
were members of the Anti-Slavery Society, and she took the liberty 
of taking their names. 

Mr. Sharp, of Dorchester — Testified that there was great ex- 
citement and uneasiness in the town in consequence of the ladies' 
names having been taken wiiliout their knowledge ; that they felt ex- 
tremely mortified in having their names published on handbills, and 
being placed and exposed to public view, in different parts of the 
town ; that he was acquainted with many of them, and that he be- 
lieved them to be very respectable and worthy women : said that they 
did not know the nature of the petition — supposed it was similar to 
that of the last year, for abolishing slavery ; that there was a general 
disapprobation excited on the subject ; that Miss Baker was very 
ardent, that her zeal had led her beyond propriety, that all with 
whom he had conversed with upon the subject disapproved very 
much of it. 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 21 

Mrs. John' Holden — Testified that she never saw any petition 
except in the hands of Miss Baker. She asked me to sign a peti- 
tion. I said that if Mrs. Clapp signed the petition to go to Wash- 
ington, to free the slaves, ask her to sign my name. 

The ladies were distressed and wretched. I never heard of the 
petition until after it was printed : heard that my name was tiiere. 
If the reception had been favorable, should have been grieved and 
mortified. Miss Rebecca Clapp and Elizabeth Clapp were very 
sick, and were deranged : Rebecca died. Have told Miss Baker 
never to come into my house again. She said that she should, 
when she had another petition. There was a great many children's 
names on the petition, some very young. 



22 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 



Medway, February 27, 1839. 
Dear Sir, 

Yours of the 26th has this moment come to hand, and I hasten to 
reply, by saying, that I have already written to L, Metcalf, Esq., one 
of your honorable body, giving a statement of facts relating to the sub- 
ject which you introduced. I am happy to explain still farther the 
particulars Sometime last fall, I believe in August, a number of pe- 
titions were presented to Mrs. Sanford to sign, most of them relating 
to the subject of slavery. Among tjiem was one "for a repeal of all 
laws making a distinction on account of color." This petition she re- 
fused to sisn, and gave her reasons for refusing, and at the same time 
she expressed a strong desire to me to prevent the circulation of the 
above named petition. My views coincided perfectly with hers, and I 
regretted that it was in circulation. Our views and feelings were 
known, and others refused to sign it for the same reasons. Some oth- 
ers differed from us in the matter who circulated the petition, and I 
believe with upright and worthy motives. These are facts in the case. 
You are at liberty to use them as your judgment may dictate. 

With earnest desires that you, and all others associated with you, 
may be guided by heavenly wisdom, 

I am yours, most respectfully, 

D. SANFORD. 

N. B. Wishing to put into your hands full testimony, it may be 
proper for you to receive the signature of Mrs. Sanford, who would 
have been happy to have written more in detail, did time allow. 

I hereby certify, that I did not sign any petition to the Legislature 
of this Commonwealth "fir a repeal of all lairs making- a distinction 
on account oj color." j 

S. P. SANFORD. 

Medway, Feb. 27, 1839. 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 23 



Dorchester, March 7, 1839. 

Dear Sir : — Suffering this evening with feeble health prevents my 
writing so extensively as I wish, in the statement of facts respecting 
the petition which I saw in your possession this afternoon. I find, on 
farther inquiry, that the ladies generally, (nor indeed have I found a 
single exception,) were entirely mistaken in regard to the disabilities 
of colored people. They have supposed that many civil privileges 
were denied them, and a number have remarked to me, that, in their 
opinion, should such a paper be circulated again, with a correct knowl- 
edge of the condition of colored people — not half the signatures 
would be obtained which are now secured. Many of the ladies signed 
w-ithout reading the petition, and others gave permission to have their 
names entered without knowing hardly to what they gave permission. 

I have reason to believe that many names are not forged. And in 
the case of Mrs. Sanford's name and one or two others, I am still 
inclined to think that the name was signed without considering the 
guilt or the consequences. I have written to Mrs. Hildrelh, express- 
ing my desire and also yours, to have her call on you to-morrow 
morning. 

In great haste, 

Yours, respectfully and affectionately, 

D. SAN FORD. 



Medw.w, March 17. 1839. 

Dear Sir ; 

I am sorry not to be able to be with you tomorrow, but my duties to 
my people actually forbid. I wish here to state, that Mrs. Sanford 
and myself were entirely ignorant of her name's being entered on that 
offensive petition until after the time it was presented to the Legisla- 
ture. On the 14th of February I saw the notice of it in " the Daily 
Advertiser." I was surprised to see it, as I knew Mrs. Sanford did 
refuse to sign it. I found also that many others in the village of Dor- 



24 DISThNCTlONS OF COLOR. [April, 

Chester were equally surprised to find it tlms entered, as they knew 
that Mrs. S. refused to sign it. I understand that Rev. Mr. Spaulding 
testified that I was in Dorchester about every week, after my leaving. 
He labored under a mistake, which I will now rectify. My family 
moved the 10th of October. After that time, I was in Dorchester at 
the ordination of my successor, about the 30th of October. I after- 
wards exchanged with him ; and, besides these, 1 once passed through 
the place, to Weymouth, and once to Boston. These were the only 
times of my being in Dorchester before the close of the year. On 
the first of January I passed through Dorchester to Haverhill ; on the 
20th of January 1 was there to spend the night, and, on the 30th, 
passed through the place to Boston. These are the only times of my 
being in Dorchester, until I was there the fourteenth of February, 
when I saw the notice of the petition. During my calls previous to 
the 14th of February, no allusion whatever was made to the petitions, 
and I presume that the people in the village were all ignorant of the 
two first names being entered. You will just bear in mind that Mrs. 
Reed gave the petition to Miss Baker ; it then went from the village 
to other parts of the town, and was not returned again to the village. 
"When circulated in the village the two first names were not down. On 
Miss Baker's taking it from the village, she forged those names, and 
then the paper circulated in the north and east parts of the town. 
These circumstances will explain some facts which may be important 
for you to know. I feel entire confidence in yourself and the other 
gentlemen of the Committee, and trust you will be guided right in the 
result, and in your report ; and cannot but believe that your efforts 
will be crowned with great good, although now, in some respects, 
trying. 



In great haste, I am yours, affectionately, 

D. SANFORD. 



MARcn Sth, 1S;39. 



Dear Brother Samoiu) : — .\ftcr you called on ine yesterday, I 
learned by inquiry, that one of the six A. S. petitions I filled out last 
summer did not have the names of Mrs. Sanford and Spauldino- on 
it when Mrs. Reed gave back to me the petitions. A remark then 



1839.] nOUSK— No. 74. 25 

struck my mind, made to me four or five months ago, by Mrs Reed or 
Lyon, (I am not quite positive which, but think it was by Mrs. R.,) 
that the space at the head of one ol the petitions was left to put tlie 
names of Mrs. Sanford and SpauUling, and therefore I put down tlieir 
names. At the time I did it, I did not take notice which of the peti- 
tions it was. All the while the petitions were in circulation, I did 7iot 
hear one syllable about an unwillingness of Mrs. S. and S. signing any 
one of them, and did not, till after they came before the Legislature. 

After hearing what you had to say to me yesterday, the thought 
struck my mind, that this was the petition, at the head of which, with 
the best of motives, I placed, as I thought I was authorized to do, the 
names of Mrs. Sanford and Spaulding I accordingly went to the 
Committee and requested to see the petition, and found the signatures 
were in my own hand writing. 

I will now state, that next Tuesday morn, at nine o'clock, I will ap- 
pear (God permitting) before the Committee, and state the facts in the 
case. 

I would further state, that I have some other facts, which I also in- 
tend to state, which will also go to prove it icas not an intentional for- 
gery. Had I time I would state to you those facts. 

I should be glad to see you before the Committee when I am there, 
if it is so you can. 

I would say further, that so far as I can now recollect your questions 
to me, that what I said, w^as correct, with a single exception. 

I feel a consciousness of having tried to do the thing that was right ; 
but have in one important particular erred through a misunderstanding of 
(I think) Mrs. Reed. It was so long ago when this occurred, that 
when you called on me, I could not bring to my recollection any thing 
of the subject, you wished to know, or should have frankly and freely 
told you. 

That God may bring about in this event his own glory, is my sincere 
_^and humble prayer. 

Respectfully yours, 



Rev. Mr. Sanford. 



SARAH BAKER. 
4 



26 DISTIXCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

Dorchester, Friday, March, B. 

Mrs. Hildreth, 

Dear Madam : — I found yesterday, in looking at the petition, that 
there were but four names signed after it went from the hands of Mrs 
Reed, before you signed ; that those four names were evidently "litten 
by llie same hand, and that AFiss Baker told me of her own accord that 
she wrote two of them. // appiars, too, that Mrs. Sanford's name 
was written by the same hand uliich wrote the four, and also, wliich 
wrote the nnme of Sarah Baker. The ciicumstances are such, that I 
cannot avoid the conviction, th;it such might be the case, though it 
might have been done with good motives and without regard to con- 
sequence. Mrs. Reed and myself saw the Committee and they desired 
to see you this morning, to secure your testimony on two points, one 
relating to Mrs. Sanf)rd's signature when vou signed, and the cir- 
cumstances then which came up in your own mind, namely, the fact 
tiiat you had heard that Mrs. Sandford had refused to sign. They 
also wish to see you respecting the fact, that you and others were ig- 
norant at the time of the disabilities of the colored people. These 
facts should be known to the Legislature, and they will aid in giving 
right in>prcssions upon the public mind. I wish, therefore, if it is 
possible, that you will go in with Mr. Hildreth this morning, and you 
will find the Committee together bv inquiiinrr for Mr. Minott Thaver^ 
of Brniiitrcc, who is one of the Committee. Mrs. Bacon I believe is 
going in, and will aid you in the matter. 

Yours truly, 

D. SANFORD- 



Dorchester, March "^l, 1S39. 
To \\. Lincoln, Esq., 

Sm: 

It is with painful surprise, that I find my name is annexed to a list 
of pitiliontjj fur the rights and privileges of the colored population of 



1839.1 HOIISK— No. 74. 27 

our Slate; and hearing, that you were a member of the Committee, to 
whom that subject was referred, I take the liberty to request you to 
erase my name, as it is a base forger i/ ; for so far from signing such a 
petition, I have never seen it. 

There are many names upon that paper which I know to be unau- 
thorized, and I presume that more than one third of them, were ob- 
tained by a species of deception. 

A knowledge of your compliance with my request, to erase my 
name, will be received with gratitude, by one who has no wish to in- 
trude herself upon the public. 

With much respect, yours, &c., 

N. D. BARNARD. 
To William Lixcoln, Esq. 



To the Chairman of the Committee on the Petition of the Ladies of 

Dorchester. 

Sir: 

Having understood, that our names are attached to a petition of the 
ladies of Dorchester, for abolishing all laws making a distinction on 
account of color, we take this method to say to the Committee, that 
we never saw or signed the petition, nor authorized any person to sign 
the same for us, and that we do not in the least approve of it, we fur- 
ther wish to have our names erased from the same. 

Yours, respectfully, 

Mrs. JOHN HOLDEN, 

HANNAH HOLDEN, 
ANN PAYSON, 
LYDIA PAYSON. 
Dorchester, March IC, 1839. 



28 



DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. 



[Aprils 



Dorchester, March 21, 1839. 

To the Chairman of the Committee on the Petition of the Ladies of 

Dorchester. 

Sir: 

Having understood that our names are attached to a petition from 
the ladies of Dorchester, to abolish all laws making a distinction on 
account of color, we take tliis opportunity to say to the Committee, 
that we never knotmngly signed said petition, but understood it to be a 
petition for the abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia ; and if our 
names are attached to said petition, it was done without our consult or 
knowledge, or under 3Iisrepresentations, and we respectfully ask tc 
have our names taken from the same. 

With respect, yours, &c. 



Celia M. Humphrey, 
Celia F. Humphrey, 
Maria A. Pierce, 
Mary Williams, 
Julia N. Swan, 
Mary Ann Lambert, 
Eliza B. Randall, 
Ann E. Randall, 
Abigail Howe, 
Eliza V. Howe, 
Sarah L. Scaverns, 
Sarah B. Seaverns, 
Mehitable Howe, 
Mary Seaverns, 
Elizabeth G. Pierce, 
Lydia H. Pierce, 



Harriet Pierce, 
Anna Pearson, 
Harriet T. Pearson, 
Susan M. Pearson, 
Mary A. Pearson, 
Mary Tolman, 
Rachel Tolman, 
Elizabeth Chamberlain , 
Betsey Gill, 
Mary Nichols, 
Anna L. Harris, 
Anna Clapp, 
Mary Adams, 
Jane B. Adams, 
Mary E. Adams, 
Hannah W. Adams. 



This is to certify, that I carried the petitions to the Mis.«;es Paysons, 
and that Miss A. R. Payson wrote her name, and her sister's, L. Pay- 
son. 

M. F. LYON. 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 29 

I would state that Mrs. M. F. Lyon is one of the authorized circu- 
lators of our petitions. 

S. BAKER, 

Cor. Sec. Dorchester F. A. S. Society. 



We hereby certify, that we never signed any petition to the Legisla- 
ture of this Commonwealth, to request them "to repeal all laws which 
make any distinction on account of color." Nor did we ever give per- 
mission foi" any one to sign our names. 

NANCY B. SEAGROVE, 
MARTHA T. PAINE. 



We hereby certify, that we placed our names upon a paper presented 
us by Mrs. Lyon of Dorchester, she only named a petition for the abo- 
lition of slavery in the District of Columbia, which we cursorily read 
and signed. We were not aware that it was filled out from the ladies 
of Dorchester only, and that our names were out of place, as we resi- 
ded in Milton. 

We do not wish to criminate any person on account of our names 
being on the other petition, as we suppose it to have arisen from some 
mistake. 



NANCY B. SEAGROVE. 
MARTHA T. PAINE. 



Milton, March 14, 1839. 



Mr. Geo. Bradburn 



Dorchester, March 1, 1839. 



Dear Sir, — Your letter of to-day, addressed to Mr. Richard Clapp, 
has been put into my hand by the gentleman to whom it is addressed, 
with a request to give you a statement of those facts therein desired re- 
specting the genuineness of the signatures to the petition of S. P. San- 
ford and 210 others, women of Dorchester, praying for the repeal of 
those laws in this State which make a distinction among its people on 
account of color. To this request, for your sake aod the cause of truth, 



so DISTINCTIONS OF COLOK. [April, 

I cheerfully comply, although it seems of little use to do so, for the 
information of a man who has no more respect for the signers of the 
petition, than to express publicly, "I don't believe there is a virtuous 
woman amon? them." If the gentleman, (yes, I say gentleman,) who 
made the above remark concerning us, has never before succeeded in 
attracting the notice of the ladies, he has done so now, and he will 
see proof of it if he lives a little longer. 

But now to your inquiry about the genuineness of the signatures to 
the above mentioned petition. I would state that I am acquainted wiili 
most of the ladies who circulated the petition, and to my personal 
knowledge, they may be relied on. 1 would say, further, I am person- 
ally knowing to some of the signatures, that they are true, arid I believe 
all arc. Many of the signers are classed among the most enlightened 
and virtuous of the community. 

The object of our petition, so far as I have been able to learn, has 
been fully expressed in your remarks on its presentation. 

May God bless and prosper you in advocating the cause of justice and 
humanity, is the sincere desire of your humble petitioner. 
SARAH BAKER, 

Cor. Sec. of the Dorchester F. A. S. Society- 

P. S. If Mr. Thaver still contitmcs to manifest his doubts as to the 
genuineness of our petition, I will, on being informed, call a meeting of 
the ladies interested, and have delegates chosen to appear, personally, 
(if they can be permitted) before the Committee. If that would not 
bdtisfy Mr. T., I know not what would. 

With due respect, &,c., 

S. B. 

Dear Sir, — At your request for information, relating to the genuine- 
ness of the sitrnatures to the ladies' petition, from Dorchester, I have ap- 
plied to Miss S. Baker, the Corresponding Secretary, for that purpose, 
and she has given a fair statement, which I believe may be relied on as 
correct ; she being of a virtuous and respectable character. 

P. S. If Mr. Thayer still doubts, he had better send for the ladie?, 
and inquire of them personally. 

Respectfully Yours, 

RICHARD CLAPP, 
Chairman of the Stlccimai of Dorchester. 

G£0. BRAi)Bl'R.N, Esq. 



1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 31 



I wrote the name of Mrs. John Ilolden, upon the petition respecting 
distinction of color, understanding it to be with her consent. 

MARTHA CLAP. 



This certifies, that when the Rev. Mr. Spaulding inquired of me 
how those names came on that petition twice, that I was not as par- 
ticular and definite as I should have been if I had known that it would 
have been stated again, and under such circumstances as it was before 
the Committee on petitions. The circumstances in tlie case were 
these. I had the petitions, and requested Miss R. Pattie to write the 
names of our family in their jiresence, to which we all agreed. She 
wrote them on two, and the bell rung to call us to work. I had 
agreed to return them immediately. There being not sufficient time 
for Miss R. Pattie to write them on all, I took them and handed them 
to a friend, and told her to put them on the rest, and I presume that 
she made a mistake and put them on one that Miss Pattie had. 

HANNAH KENNEY. 

March 14, 1^39. 



I doubt not that the way those names came on one of the petitions 
twice, as stated above by Miss U. Kenney, is correct. It may be as- 
certained by my hand-writing. I did not write them designedly, if at 
all, for I should have known that it was wrong, and would militate 
against the cause we wished to promote. We regret that any such 
thing should have happened, but no one, knowing the circumstance, 
presumes that there was any evil designed. 

CATHARINE JORDAN. 



DoRcnESTEK, March '.25, 1839. 
Friend Br.\dburn : 

If the Committee to whom our petition is referred has not written 
their report, I would state a few items for their instruction. Of the 
names sent in last Friday morning, is one Anna Clapp. This person 



32 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 

never signed the petition, but seeing her name on the printed list, she 
Ihouglit it had been forged. There is one Ann Clapp who did sign, 
that docs iwt wish to have her name taken off. I am informed by Ann 
Clapp that she generally adds e to her name, thus : Anne. This ac- 
counts for the mistake. A. R. and L. Payson are now convinced that 
their names were put on the petition by A. R. Payson, as Mrs. Lyon 
has already testified. 1 learn also that nearly all whose names are said 
to be on the petition without their knowledge or consent, did not mean 
to say thus. They meant to state they did not understand the object 
of the petition, and therefore wish their names to be taken off. '^^ ill 
you please inform the Committee of these facts. 

I would also say, that Mrs. Holdcn, who appeared before the Com- 
mittee, is an oi)poser to the object of the petition, and has done her 
best to get those names which have virtually backed out. With a sin- 
cere desire to have the truth, and only the truth, known, I have written 
these lines. 

Respectfully yours, 

SARAH BAKER. 



To the Committee to whom the petition making distinction on account of 

color is referred. 

Gentlemen : 

I have some apprehensions that what I said before you might not be 
rightly understood. If this is the case, I would most gladly make a 
recjipitulation. But whether it is or not, I wish to say a few woidson 
the subject. 

I stated, respecting Mr. Sanford's question to me, " Whether 1 did 
or did not put Mrs. Sanford's name on that petition,'' that I had no 
recollection of doing it. This is confirmed by the testimony of Mrs. 
Ann P. Reed and my sister. The question having been put a number 
of times by one of your number for a positive answer, I merely ad- 
mitted, for the time being, that T said no; having in view, when I ad- 
mitted it, the ai)Ovcnientioned evidence, that I did answer the (juestion 
wit/i (juallficaliun. 

I would state further in allusion to the names of Charlotte Tuttle 
and E. il. Clapp, that, when 1 mforuied them of their names bemg put 

MB ■< 3. 



1839.] ' HOUSE— No. 74. 33 

on the petition, while they were dangerously ill. I asked them if they 
would have them taken off, and I was told " No, let them go on." 
After the petition came into your hands for examination, I sent to 
for a written answer to my question about their names being on, and 
received one from Miss Tutlle, saying she had vo objection to her 
name being on the petition. The other Miss E. H. C. was not at 
home, so I did not get any writing from her. Miss E. H. Clapp is 
the recording secretary of our F. A. S. Society. 

One word more, in allusion to my misunderstanding about putting 
down the names of Mrs. Sanford and Spaulding. I was informed by 
Mrs. Lyon, in the presence of a number of witnesses, that she under- 
stood the names of Mrs. S. and S. were to be put on the space at the 
head of one of the petitions. It was in Mrs. Lyon's house, and at the 
moral reform meeting alluded to, that I received the petitions of Airs. 
Reed, and heard at the same time Mrs. R's remark by which I under- 
stood she meant for me to put down the names of Mrs. Sanford and 
Spaulding. In this Mrs. Lyon's testimony confirms my own. 

I could allude to more evidence if necessary, to shew that my con- 
nexion with, and knowledge of, the disputed petition has been open 
and honest, but think any candid person would be satisfied with what 
I have already given. 

With due respects, &:-c., 

SARAH BAKER. 



This is to certify, that I have no objection to having my name on the 
paper. 

CHARLOTTE TUTTLE. 

[The above, written in reference to the petition on color, and given 
to Alraira Baker to present to the Committee.] 



March II, 1S39. 

On account of the feeble state of my health, I am prevented from 
appearing with Miss Sarah Baker, before the Committee, to testify to 



34 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, '39- 

the genuineness of our righteous but insulted petition. This, there- 
fore, is to certify, that I have been intimately acquainted with Mis3 
Baker's course in re^rd to this petition, and that 1 approve and high- 
ly commend her proceedings. 

Furthermore, I would state, I approved of and signed the petition. 

ELIZA POPE, 
Treasurer of the D. F. A. S. S. 



(. 



-7" 



H/ 



J i 



I I 



.c 



** 












vV 



'5' ^ 

■0. -■- 






,0^ 



x^ -V^ 



' • o , 






^'^ 






':^'" ^ .0 



.5^ 



* 
I 1 









'^>- >.A^ 



V 









c- 






4U 






,.*^'r 






-^o A^ .»• 



-> %,^ ;)^^\ X/ ;>^^-. %,^ 






^vP A^ V 






••>^ 



t- . ^ • o V . ''-0 

V *•-* A^ % *»-" A^ ^. '"• .V 









vT 



^"- 


*'.-.«• 

V 


'/ 




•''^ 


0^ 






>•* 


°<. 




\'^' 


<. • 


• . 





'^. 






bv^ : -^^-0^ ■ '*bv 



• 


' kS 




■i."^ -^ 


^^ •. 




> 


'o . 


; * A 




^ 




"°. 






o - 


>\. 






^^^ 






A 




O 


V 






<y 




>P 


•=v. 




^^ 


^^ 


f 


» ' 


..x 






' - 






r 



, J^ ' o V . ^' - o 1 






♦ '" '^ A^ ' ^'* "^V C^ 

/ -*,/ :--;■: ■\,*^ ^-^-••'^"'^■^0^ ^■■'■:^'^ 

-^..-. . .- V^ - ^ ^ ..,^.■. ...o ^ ^ , 



> •5' ■; <i • . 



o 



'"-^ 



^ ,> "^^ v^ » %\ V», .-V' 



DOEBSBROS. , ^ • o _1 J f 

O LIBRARY BINDING < O^ O *P "TV ^ f- 



^te 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



I 

011 695 784 A 




